Thoughts from the interface of science, religion, law and culture

After spending several years touring the country as a stand up comedian, Ed Brayton tired of explaining his jokes to small groups of dazed illiterates and turned to writing as the most common outlet for the voices in his head. He has appeared on the Rachel Maddow Show and the Thom Hartmann Show, and is almost certain that he is the only person ever to make fun of Chuck Norris on C-SPAN.

EVENTS

Lapin: Not Having Children is Anti-Social

You remember Daniel Lapin, the Christian right’s favorite wingnut rabbi who says that retirement is un-biblical? Well now he also says that it’s “anti-social” not to have children, at least partly because they have to support you during retirement. Yes, I’m serious.

Green: If you are in a society and culture that has that connection and that places a high value on religion and affiliation there and you get the better health that results, it looks like now, the way that America is going with socialized medicine, those states that are like that are going to end up footing the bill for the states that choose the other path, which is less connection and less affiliation with religion and those things because they are going to have a higher health bill. But now, with socialized medicine, we’ll pay for it.

Lapin: Oh, absolutely. And by the way, that is also true of Social Security. It’s all very well people choose not to have children; not only do they pay a health penalty for that but the truth is that your children and mine are going to have to pay for them. People say “it’s not true, I have my investments to take care of me, I don’t need children.” Well, that may be true, however your investments depend on a growing market of customers because your investments are in company and what characterizes a profitable company is that it has customers; it’s customer are my children.

Green: Yeah, that’s a good point, I hadn’t even thought about that. If you don’t have children, first of all, they are not contributing to the overall marketplace but also the tax base and everything else.

Lapin: That is exactly right. So I really do think that a claim of anti-social behavior can be lodged at the door of people who choose not to have children.

This reminds me of the gay marriage “debate.” One of the primary purposes of marriage is procreation, we are told by the bigots – but not a word about long-term relationships like mine, which has no chance of procreation, as my girlfriend of almost ten years now is past child-bearing age. Why aren’t they frothing at the mouth to prevent us from getting married, if procreation is so goddamn important?

Green: If you are in a society and culture that has that connection and that places a high value on religion and affiliation there and you get the better health that results, it looks like now, the way that America is going with socialized medicine, those states that are like that are going to end up footing the bill for the states that choose the other path, which is less connection and less affiliation with religion and those things because they are going to have a higher health bill. But now, with socialized medicine, we’ll pay for it.

I wouldn’t worry about it, Green. We residents of blue states have grown accustomed to the fact that the red states will never take responsibility for themselves and that we have to foot the bill to keep you from sliding into third world status.

Though I am curious about what is “socialized” about expanding the current system of for profit health insurance.

I’m sure what Mr. Lapin means by children supporting their elderly parents is that can be in a position to boss them around in accordance with his religion’s geriocratic, patriarchial view of society. Of course, this isn’t exclusive to his interpretation of Judaism. I have fundamentalist Christian relatives who tell me that I need to obey them on the grounds that they are my “elder.”

your investments depend on a growing market of customers because your investments are in company and what characterizes a profitable company is that it has customers; it’s customer are my children

That’s communism talk there, buddy. My progeny are not obligated to buy things from the companies in which you invest. If your company cannot create its own customer base without my hypothetical future children, it deserves to fail.

Silly rabbit, consistency is for rational people.

If that was an intentional play on words (beyond the Trix reference), very nice. If not, you lucked out: Lapin is French for “rabbit.”

Yeah, and then you get the people like me who, childless, make plans to redistribute their wealth and possessions in beneficial ways to those who could use it, and the local community. If you notice Lapin’s underlying assumptions are that everyone is going to be completely selfish. Methinks he doth project too much.

Paragraph One: Very thick word salad.
Paragraph Two: Fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between demands from the market and quantity of consumers.
Paragraph Three: Happy dog nodding his head at his master.
Paragraph Four: Wingnut death cult perpetuating the idea of propagation as central responsibility.